Ex Parte BROWNING et al - Page 57



                Appeal 2007-0700                                                                              
                Application 09/159,509                                                                        
                Patent 5,559,995                                                                              

                      claim8 in all aspects, the recapture rule bars the claim; (2) if it is                  
                      narrower in all aspects, the recapture rule does not apply, but                         
                      other rejections are possible; (3) if the reissue claim is broader                      
                      in some aspects, but narrower in others, then: (a) if the reissue                       
                      claim is as broad as or broader in an aspect germane to a prior                         
                      art rejection, but narrower in another aspect completely                                
                      unrelated to the rejection, the recapture rule bars the claim; (b)                      
                      if the reissue claim is narrower in an aspect germane to prior art                      
                      rejection, and broader in an aspect unrelated to the rejection, the                     
                      recapture rule does not bar the claim, but other rejections are                         
                      possible.  Mentor is an example of (3)(a); Ball is an example of                        
                      (3)(b).                                                                                 
                In re Clement at 1470, 45 USPQ2d at 1165 (footnote added).                                    
                      In Ex parte Eggert, 67 USPQ2d 1716 (Bd. Pat. App. & Int. 2003)                          
                (precedential), an expanded panel of the Board determined that the reissue                    
                claims had been narrowed in the same aspect (i.e., the shape of the retaining                 
                member) in which they were broadened with regard to a patent claim.  The                      
                Board found that the applicant for reissue had presented claims that were                     
                narrower than the surrendered subject matter in an aspect germane to the                      
                prior art rejection and broader only in aspects unrelated to the rejection.                   
                According to the Board, the recapture rule did not bar the claims because the                 
                                                                                                              
                8  The “canceled or amended claim” is the claim that was canceled or                          
                amended.  “Once we determine that an applicant has surrendered the subject                    
                matter of the canceled or amended claim, we then determine whether the                        
                surrendered subject matter has crept into the reissue claim” (emphasis                        
                added).  In re Clement at 1469, 45 USPQ2d at 1164.  In Clement, the Federal                   
                Circuit compared the reissue claim with the corresponding application claim                   
                as it stood before the amendments added during prosecution.  See In re                        
                Clement at 1470-71, 45 USPQ2d at 1165-66.                                                     
                                                    - 57 -                                                    

Page:  Previous  50  51  52  53  54  55  56  57  58  59  60  61  62  63  64  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013